| Literature DB >> 34143832 |
Eric Bonetto1,2, Guillaume Dezecache1, Armelle Nugier1, Marion Inigo3, Jean-Denis Mathias4, Sylvie Huet4, Nicolas Pellerin5, Maya Corman1, Pierre Bertrand1, Eric Raufaste5, Michel Streith1, Serge Guimond1, Roxane de la Sablonnière6, Michael Dambrun1.
Abstract
This study examines the evolution of Schwartz's Basic Human Values during the COVID-19 outbreak, and their relationships with perceived threat, compliance with movement restrictions and social distancing. An online questionnaire was administered to a heterogeneous sample of French citizens (N = 1025) during the first French lockdown related to the outbreak. Results revealed a significant evolution of values; the conservation value was higher during the outbreak than usual, and both self-enhancement and openness-to-change values were lower during the COVID-19 outbreak than usual. Conservation and perceived threat during the outbreak were robustly and positively related to both compliance with movement restrictions and social distancing. Conservation during the outbreak emerged as a significant partial mediator of the relationship between perceived threat and outcomes (i.e., compliance with movement restrictions and social distancing). Implications of these results for the malleability of values and the COVID-19 modelling are discussed.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34143832 PMCID: PMC8213047 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253430
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Descriptives of the variables (N, missing data, mean, SD, Skewness, Kurtosis and Cronbach alpha).
| N | Missing | Mean | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis | Cronbach alpha | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-Transcendence | 873 | 152 | 81.1 | 12.9 | -1.14 | 2.96 | 0.67 |
| Conservation | 851 | 174 | 50.6 | 17.9 | -0.12 | -0.30 | 0.71 |
| Self-Enhancement | 873 | 152 | 36.5 | 21.5 | 0.27 | -0.63 | 0.80 |
| Openness to Change | 873 | 152 | 68.1 | 15.5 | -0.46 | 0.67 | 0.70 |
| Self-Transcendence | 740 | 285 | 82.3 | 14.2 | -1.28 | 3.11 | 0.66 |
| Conservation | 730 | 295 | 61.0 | 19.2 | -0.71 | 0.36 | 0.74 |
| Self-Enhancement | 740 | 285 | 22.5 | 20.9 | 1.05 | 0.50 | 0.81 |
| Openness to Change | 740 | 285 | 57.8 | 20.1 | -0.20 | -0.20 | 0.75 |
| Perceived threat | 925 | 100 | 67.6 | 21.2 | -0.71 | 0.39 | 0.78 |
| Compliance | 716 | 309 | 94.4 | 12.4 | -3.75 | 17 | - |
| z-score compliance EXP_transformation | 716 | 309 | 0.00 | 1.00 | -0.58 | -1.64 | - |
| Social distancing | 710 | 315 | 92.1 | 17.5 | -3.49 | 13.3 | 0.71 |
| z-score social distancing_ EXP_transformation | 710 | 315 | 0.00 | 1.00 | -0.21 | -1.92 | - |
Note:
**p < .01,
***p < .001.
Means, difference scores and BF10 of Schwartz’ values according to the response context (i.e., usually in life vs. during the Covid-19 outbreak).
| Usually in life | Covid-19 outbreak | Mdiff | d | BF10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 81.28 | 82.27 | +0.98 | 0.11 | 2.86 | |
| Universalism | 82.98 | 84.23 | +1.24 | 0.12 | 8.76 |
| Benevolence | 79.83 | 80.41 | +0.57 | 0.05 | 0.09 |
| 49.86 | 61.03 | +11.17 | 0.92 | > 150 | |
| Tradition | 35.34 | 38.46 | +3.13 | 0.22 | > 150 |
| Conformity | 57.44 | 73.25 | +15.81 | 0.82 | > 150 |
| Security | 56.81 | 71.10 | +14.28 | 0.78 | > 150 |
| 35.03 | 22.54 | -12.48 | -0.88 | > 150 | |
| Power | 26.07 | 18.50 | -7.57 | -0.52 | > 150 |
| Achievement | 43.99 | 26.59 | -17.40 | -0.89 | > 150 |
| 67.58 | 57.76 | -9.82 | -0.62 | > 150 | |
| Hedonism | 73.48 | 67.58 | -5.90 | -0.30 | > 150 |
| Stimulation | 56.09 | 40.33 | -15.76 | -0.71 | > 150 |
| Self-Direction | 73.33 | 65.40 | -7.94 | -0.41 | > 150 |
Note:
**p < .01,
***p < .001.
Fig 1Magnitude of endorsement of Schwartz’ values (0: Not at all; 100: Completely, for each values) according to the response context (i.e., usually in life and during the Covid-19 pandemic).
Beta coefficients and partial coefficients (standardized) between Schwart’s values, compliance with movement restrictions and social distancing.
| Z-score Compliance (EXP_transformation) | Z-score Social distancing (EXP_transformation) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VIF | VIF | |||||
| Self-Transcendence | 0.16 | 0.15 | 2.49 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 2.53 |
| Conservation | 0.15 | -0.03 | 2.73 | 0.12 | 0.01 | 2.97 |
| Self-Enhancement | -0.06 | - | - | -0.07 | - | - |
| Openness to Change | -0.05 | - | - | 0.00 | - | - |
| Self-Transcendence | 0.14 | -0.03 | 2.58 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 2.59 |
| Conservation | 0.21 | 0.22 | 2.86 | 0.16 | 0.14 | 2.89 |
| Self-Enhancement | -0.06 | - | - | -0.09 | -0.10 | 1.25 |
| Openness to Change | -0.06 | - | - | -0.02 | - | - |
| Age | - | -0.03 | 1.15 | - | 0.05 | 1.23 |
| Gender | - | -0.05 | 1.03 | - | -0.04 | 1.07 |
| SES | - | 0.05 | 1.38 | - | -0.05 | 1.38 |
| Education | - | 0.09 | 1.27 | - | -0.05 | 1.27 |
Note:
***p < .001,
**p < .01,
*p < .05.
VIF = Variance Inflation Factor. Partial ß were controlled for values that were significantly related to the outcome and for socio-demographic variables (i.e., age, gender, SES, and education).
Beta coefficients and partial coefficients (standardized) between perceived threat and Schwart’s values.
| Perceived Threat | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| VIF | |||
| Self-Transcendence | 0.12 | 0.00 | 2.59 |
| Conservation | 0.32 | 0.00 | 2.95 |
| Self-Enhancement | 0.09 | 0.04 | 1.37 |
| Openness to Change | -0.02 | - | - |
| Self-Transcendence | 0.13 | 0.10 | 2.81 |
| Conservation | 0.41 | 0.35 | 2.94 |
| Self-Enhancement | -0.01 | - | - |
| Openness to Change | -0.20 | -0.20 | 1.23 |
| Age | 0.05 | 1.30 | |
| Gender | -0.03 | 1.07 | |
| SES | 0.03 | 1.39 | |
| Education | -0.04 | 1.28 | |
Note:
***p < .001,
**p < .01,
*p < .05.
VIF = Variance Inflation Factor. Partial ß were controlled for values that were significantly related to the outcome and for socio-demographic variables (i.e., age, gender, SES, and education).
Path-analysis models showing the direct, indirect, and total effect of perceived threat on compliance with movement restrictions (model A) and social distancing (model B) via endorsement of conservation during Covid-19 pandemic.
| Effect | Estimate | SE | 95% C.I. (BC) | z | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
| Model A: Perceived threat -> Conservation during outbreak -> Compliance | |||||||
| Indirect | .003 | 8.64e-4 | .002 | .005 | .07 | 3.65 | < .001 |
| Direct | .006 | .002 | .002 | .009 | .12 | 2.94 | .003 |
| Total | .009 | .002 | .005 | .012 | .19 | 5.04 | < .001 |
| Model B: Perceived threat -> Conservation during outbreak -> Social Distancing | |||||||
| Indirect | .002 | 8.37e-4 | 2.79e-4 | .004 | .04 | 2.19 | .029 |
| Direct | .008 | .002 | .004 | .01 | .17 | 4.16 | < .001 |
| Total | .01 | .002 | .006 | .01 | .21 | 5.65 | < .001 |